Why do no homosexual activists take offense, or even speak out, about the communist / leftist regime which is SUPPOSED to be the tolerant, pro-gay rights wing, using a term for a gay sexual practice as a slur to mock other people? Do neither they, nor the leftards, see the irony here? Is that how much the leftards really “respect” the diversity of those who practice same-sex acts? Is that the example of the left’s ‘tolerance’ of gays, to use them as a pejorative?

Is it not the same as if some group which purported to support racial equality, called other people, “You ni**er”,, or “Those wops”, as a slur, and no one said anything?

[A lesbian is voted Homecoming King and her girlfriend was voted Queen.]

This is discrimination. There’s no reason the sexually immature, inexperienced teenager Rebeca Arellano can’t run for homo QUEEN and bring her current protest/hate mommie revenge object/toy/fling/experiment to the prom. This is the anti-hetero Left’s hostile takeover of school extracurricular functions. They already have the classroom and like cancer they’re invading everything else.

All males eligible for King should sue for discrimination. Make this idiotic ISD pay for its Leftist “values.”

I recently took a long trip for work and spent a lot of hours in the air. One of my fellow passengers really stood out in my mind: a 20-something lass a few rows ahead of me. She is a natural-born beauty in that “launch a thousand ships” kind of way – slim, near-perfect symmetrical features, piercing blue eyes, and a shapely body. She is, simply, stunning. But there’s more to this story than a retired soldier admiring an exquisite example of female flesh young enough to be my daughter.

It was actually her tattoo that first caught my attention.

She was wearing a low-slung top that revealed a HUGE eagle inked across her chest and extending down under the front of her shirt. And then I noticed her hair – what little there was of it. I’ve always kept my hair short, even by military standards, and her hair was shorter than mine. Few things de-feminize a woman more than buzzing off her hair, which is why it is considered to be shameful in many societies. She was wearing ratty, ripped jeans and far too much costume jewelry. And then I noticed the piercings. As I stood six inches behind her for several minutes waiting to de-plane I counted seven, and that was just what was visible. I wondered what else she had done to herself. A tramp-stamp is a given, but who knows what other “body art” was hidden out of my view[...]

I asked myself what would cause the stunningly-beautiful young woman on my flight – at the height of her Sexual Market Value – to do that to herself? Women dress for us, so what does she intend for us to infer? I’m easy? I’m rebellious? I can drink you under the table?

I can think of no message that her chosen facade would convey that would be in her long-term interest. In a few years after her looks fade she is likely to be just another tatted-up skank wondering where the good men are.

It didn’t have to be this way. In a different social environment a woman like her would have learned to be (gasp!) feminine. She would have observed the older women in her surroundings and absorbed benevolent patriarchy in the air she grew up breathing. With her beauty she could have married above her economic station and lived a comfortable life. We can’t know if she would have been happy, but she almost certainly would have had stability, security and comfort. But she doesn’t live in that society; she lives in a “Slut Walk” society, thanks to feminism. When she chose the “Suicide Girl” look nobody stopped her. Now she has mutilated herself with enough ink and metal trinkets to repel the kind of man most likely to give her the life she wants, because no matter what she does to the outside of her body, she will eventually want what women have always wanted on the inside – stability, security and comfort.

If you want education you better include the fear of God, if you want to be a good scientist you better include the fear of God, if you want to be a good musician—1962, ’63, the U.S. Supreme Court in three decisions said no more fear of God in education, we want education to be secular. All right, that’s a theological issue. How’s that working out? In 1962, ’63, America was number one in the world in literacy, we are now number sixty-five in the world in literacy. We don’t have the fear of the Lord, because guess what, we don’t have knowledge, it goes down.

The Scriptures say a woman must ignore her “feelings” about the will of God, and do what her husband says. She is to obey her husband as if he were God Himself. She can be as certain of God’s will, when her husband speaks, as if God had spoken audibly from Heaven!

[...]

What If a Husband Expressly Commands Something Explicitly Wrong?

When women ask me this question, I counter with two of my own:

1) “Have you been living in daily obedience to your husband as part of your wholehearted, loving submission to God?”

(This is an essential part of the problem. If a woman has not been submissive, God has no responsibility for her situation and cannot be blamed if her husband requires something wrong.)

In the hundreds of times I have asked these questions, not once, if my memory is right, has a woman answered, “Yes, I am always obedient, and yet my husband has required me to break one of God’s laws.”

Never! Why?

Because, when a woman takes God at His word, submits to her husband without reservation, fears God and loves Him, then God takes upon Himself the responsibility to see that a woman does not have to sin!

[...]

Don’t I Have Any Rights?

Can you find a Kleenex somewhere and mop up the tears, just for a minute, long enough to talk to me about what your rights really are?

You don’t have any rights, no rights at all. You lost them on the day you rebelled against God. You lost them, not because you are a woman, but because you are a sinner, just as I am.

Have you noticed how many Scriptures there are that command a wife to obey her husband, and how few Scriptures there are that command her to love her husband? There is only one Scripture, to my knowledge, that tells a wife to love him, and that is Titus 2:4. Why? Because, I think, in a marvelous, supernatural way, submission brings love. If you obey him, you will love him, love him more than you ever dreamed possible.

[...]

There’s a strange paradox in Scripture, echoed in many places: If you would live, you must die (John 12:24). If you would keep your life, you must lose it (Matt. 10:39). If you would be free, you must submit yourself a slave to Christ (Rom. 6:18). And there is one more paradox which must be taken by faith as well: if you would know true freedom, you must submit to your husband’s authority. Obedience certainly has its great and final reward in Heaven, but it also has the present tangible reward. … Obedience brings happiness!

Promoting the November 11 The Call: Detroit to a church group this week, Lou Engle gave them an ominous warning: if the city of Detroit doesn’t sustain the message of The Call, then prepare for a demonic invasion. “If we actually have The Call and you don’t sustain prayer ongoing you open a vacuum for demons seven times worse to come in,” Engle said, “if black and white can’t move together in prayer and sustain it, forget it let’s not even go there, you get demons seven times worse.” Engle and other New Apostolic Reformation figures have been trying to use the language of racial reconciliation in order to bring African Americans into the Religious Right and break the supposed demonic curse over African Americans. But Engle claims that if you don’t listen to him you need to prepare for hell to literally break loose.

YOUR CHILDREN ARE BEING TAUGHT BY THE GOVERNMENT TO BE SECULAR HUMANISTS!!!!

Children who attend godless socialist schools will learn to think and reason godlessly! They MUST merely to cooperate in the classroom!

Children who attend our nation's socialist schools learn, merely by attending, that government has the police power to take money from neighbors to give them tuition-free schooling. They learn, too, that government has enormous police power to FORCE citizens to use the socialist schooling. Well! ( Is a “duh” needed here.) If government can give the kids free school, why not force citizens to pay for an use lots of socialist goodies?

PARENTS! ( Yes, I am shouting.) When you send your child off to a godless and socialist school, and then try to undo at home the godless and socialist teaching of that school, don't be surprised that your children roll their eyes, sigh, and stand sullenly with one hand on the hip. Your kids are **correctly** thinking in their heads that you are a HYPOCRITE for sending them to a godless and socialist school in the first place!

TEACHERS! Give it up! If you **really** cared about kids, you would be rescuing these kids. You would be working to get kids OUT of these godless concentration camps! You would not be willingly seeking a job, taking money, supporting, establishing, and promoting a GODLESS and socialist institution. Teachers who care about kids don't teach them to think godlessly, hand out godless textbooks, or assign godlessly bland assignments, Teachers who love kids don't support an institution that teachers children to be comfortable with socialism or assist with it in ANY manner!

And....TEACHERS! ....If you foolishly believe that you can sneak in a few conservative and Christian principles into your classes then you are teaching a lesson! You are teaching kids that Christians and conservatives are SNEAKY!

They object to us using a photo of a crowd scene, which symbolizes the tens of thousands of New Hampshire voters who are part of our effort. They're upset that the photo was not taken at a NOM rally. Seriously?! NOM using a common use photo in the public domain is considered a great scandal, yet they can redefine marriage—the most important social institution of society against the wishes of New Hampshire voters—and nobody is supposed to object? It's as if the institution of marriage gets mugged, and they complain about speeding in the neighborhood when someone rushes it to the hospital!

Keep in mind that the church of England has “officially recognized” the use of Sharia Law in Britain, so anything coming from any church there should be ignored. Appaently, freaks are now welcomed in Britain as much as radical Muslims. Very soon, the Muslims will have full control of the country, rather than simply partial control. I wonder what headless lesbians look like.

[and what is the dogma held by all atheists?what are the rituals followed by all atheists? i've known some for years. i haven't seen any core beliefs, strictures, etc. they have no buildings set aside for their followers, no special sites,(land wise). what are their basic books?]

Dogma=there is no god; rituals=ridicule those who believe in any diety; buildings=clubs, libraries, science labs or anywhere that man can trump God in their eyes; basic books=anything made by Man that opposes God. Sad lot.

A question was asked of me that I was unable to answer and I am wondering if someone on here can help me. I was talking to someone close to me, of prophecy in the bible and how historically, nations who have sheltered the Jews have thrived, but those nations who have abused them suffered eventually. As an example, the British were supposed to protect the interests of the Jews in palestine when setting up their homeland, but sold out most of the land for oil, so that now, the Jews only hold a tiny part of what they should have. Consequently, the British empire has gone the way of many in the past. The question I was asked was, if this is so, why is Germany, who nigh on wiped the Jews from the face of the earth, prospering as she does. It would appear Germany lost the war but won the battle. I know God's will, will be done and Gen 12:3 stands as true to day and forever as it always has. It would appear that in times past retribution was fairly quick but Germany does appear to be calling the shots in Europe today.

So long as I am a Catholic (in communion with the Holy See) it certainly is my business whether seminarians in Catholic seminaries are sympathizing with the SSPX schism. By "healing this rift," the Church (NOT the schism) would be engaging in an act analogous to the State department welcoming to its ranks Cold War era communists (i.e. enemies). That would not be "strengthening" America or its diplomacy and welcoming the SSPX vipers back into the ranks of the Church will not strengthen the Church one iota. Name ONE THING that Fellay and company will bring to the Church not easily attainable without them. Do you think we would "strengthen" the Church by welcoming in its rebels of the left???

Yet again for the thousandth time to those who sympathize with the schism, I don't really care whether you flirt with the near occasion of sin by attending their Masses and listening to the seditious sermons of their suspended clerics pretending Catholicism. Congratulations on avoiding them so far. Their Masses are valid. If it were otherwise, they would be deserving of no more attention than Pope Michael of the front porch easy chair in North Dakota or Fr. Nicholas Gruner and his Fatima apostolate engaged in against the orders of his diocesan ordinaries in two dioceses.

Until how, I have patiently given you the benefit of the doubt. Shamelessly cheerleading in advance for Rome to capitulate to the schismatics makes further patience impractical and unlikely. You can cuddle and croon Kumbaya to those who, like de Mallerais in particular have exercised their vicious yaps in studied sedition against John Paul II and other popes who have offended the tastes of Marcel's love slaves. I will stick to loyalty to the papacy and the promises of Jesus Christ and the hope that the Vatican will require the total humiliation of the schismatics as the price of any reconciliation.

Rash judgment??? These schismatic vipers have been trashing the Church and the papacy and pretending they are Catholic while insisting on the right to instruct the popes as to what Catholicism is. Burning is too good for them unless and until they submit to deserved humiliation or be honest enough to admit that more then two decades of rank rebellion and vicious mistreatment of popes proves conclusively that they have they have long since abandoned the Roman Catholic Church.

Other than the usual "hopey changey" nonsense of the schism and its sympathizers who have spent years since John Paul II's death confidently and erroneously predicting surrender by the Vatican any moment now, is there any actual evidence that these malicious malcontents and idiots will EVER submit without conditions or mental reservations to the legitimate authority of the pope and of the actual teaching magisterium??? Of course not!

What shall we think of Susie? Shall we bless a mother who kills her own child to save herself? Are we proud of such a woman? Shall we sing of her virtues? Perhaps we should just chalk-up her decision to feed her son to the sharks as “an unfortunate, but necessary evil.” After all, she was just acting in self-defense. It was either the mother or the child. One would live and the other would die. Who could blame Mama for wanting to fight for her life, even if it meant that her son would be torn to pieces in the darkness of night?

In point of fact, this woman’s behavior is utterly despicable. Susie is a criminal. Her behavior is indefensible. To murder another is wrong, but for a mother to murder her own child as an act of self-preservation is a crime of unspeakable ignominy.

Bottom line: Being a veteran does not buy you a free ticket to default respect for life. It is contingent on your treatment of your country and your fellow Americans.

If you join an anti-American group like Veterans for Peace, who have broken bread with and supported our enemies, then you lose that default respect we should give all veterans.

Plus, these scumbags have stood outside Walter Reed protesting. I have seen them with my own eyes and counterprotested against them. I detest all of them down to the bottom of my soul, I don’t care what their status as a veteran is.

A CNN anchor asked earlier this week whether or not Jesus would occupy Wall Street.

That question can be answered with a categorical “No.”

First, Jesus has no truck with rank, blatant hypocrites. The OWS crowd has now fallen to squabbling over who gets a slice of the $500,000 which has been donated to them, and which, by the way, they put in one of the evil, greedy banks they are out to destroy.

…

Secondly, Jesus has no truck with those whose entire agenda is to flagrantly disobey two of the Ten Commandments of God.

God said, “Thou shalt not steal,” a commandment Jesus affirmed on numerous occasions. Stealing is wrong, and it doesn’t make it right when government does it under color of law.

…

And the OWS crowd is animated by a thoroughly ugly disregard for the 10th Commandment as well. God says, “Thou shalt not covet...any thing that is thy neighbor’s.” And yet the Occupiers are driven by a dark, bitter, resentful, angry and acquisitive greed for stuff that belongs to other people.

I submit that no political program that is predicated on a violation of twenty percent of God’s moral law can possibly be right, can possibly work, or can possibly be good for America.

Jesus took a whip to the thieves and the covetous in his day. If he were to come back and do the same thing today, he just might start in Zuccotti Park.